NASA admits they can't send a human to Mars

[Divine Wind]

Not a blank check. That check came with a directive. If they didn't meet their annual goes, the Democratic Congress could cancel it.

I grew up during that time ... we all lived space. Astronauts were rock stars and the world held it's breath for every launch. Every school kid could name all the parts of the LEM and we drank Tang for breakfast.

The country will never be behind anything ever again the way it was behind the Space Program ... that's what I mean by a wasted opportunity.

So did I. That doesn't change the fact NASA didn't have a choice in the nature of it's mission. The funding was to go to the Moon within the decade.

The USAF was working on a space plane of which the X-15 was one of many in a series designed to take us toward the Pan Am space plane seen in "2001". That plan, like in the movie would have taken a few decades to get to the Moon, but allowed us to stay there with the infrastructure of Earth-to-Orbit space planes, a hub space station and Earth orbit-to-Moon transports. All reusable .

 

[Divine Wind]

It didn't take long for space exploration to catch up with the current limits of chemistry & physics.

All kinds of fantasies came outta it like the suitcase flying cars of the Jetsons and 20 hour work week. Can you imagine nutcases in 3 dimensions?

It's back to the grunt work of basic science republicans hate & try to stop at every turn.

It's not as sexy.....but investment in energy, healthcare, communications, transportation pays more dividends than getting a photo-op on Mars

True, but the goal isn't "a photo-op on Mars".

 

[fncceo]

It's back to the grunt work of basic science republicans hate & try to stop at every turn.

Change the record, it's getting old. I have two science degrees and have voted Republican since the '70s. When politics (anyone's politics) gets involved in science, it ceases to be science.

 

[fncceo]

The USAF was working on a space plane of which the X-15 was one of many in a series designed to take us toward the Pan Am space plane seen in "2001". That plan, like in the movie would have taken a few decades to get to the Moon, but allowed us to stay there with the infrastructure of Earth-to-Orbit space planes, a hub space station and Earth orbit-to-Moon transports. All reusable .

Yes, I remember. As a young Boy Scout, my scoutmaster worked at Edwards AFB. I met the X-15 / X-20 pilots and got to see all the space planes ... Congress killed that Air Force run space program and gave NASA the only ticket into space.

 

[rightwinger]

It didn't take long for space exploration to catch up with the current limits of chemistry & physics.

All kinds of fantasies came outta it like the suitcase flying cars of the Jetsons and 20 hour work week. Can you imagine nutcases in 3 dimensions?

It's back to the grunt work of basic science republicans hate & try to stop at every turn.

It's not as sexy.....but investment in energy, healthcare, communications, transportation pays more dividends than getting a photo-op on Mars

True, but the goal isn't "a photo-op on Mars".

Then what value do we get that can't be performed by a unmanned rovers?

 

[MarkDuffy]

Not a blank check. That check came with a directive. If they didn't meet their annual goes, the Democratic Congress could cancel it.

I grew up during that time ... we all lived space. Astronauts were rock stars and the world held it's breath for every launch. Every school kid could name all the parts of the LEM and we drank Tang for breakfast.

The country will never be behind anything ever again the way it was behind the Space Program ... that's what I mean by a wasted opportunity.

So did I. That doesn't change the fact NASA didn't have a choice in the nature of it's mission. The funding was to go to the Moon within the decade.

The USAF was working on a space plane of which the X-15 was one of many in a series designed to take us toward the Pan Am space plane seen in "2001". That plan, like in the movie would have taken a few decades to get to the Moon, but allowed us to stay there with the infrastructure of Earth-to-Orbit space planes, a hub space station and Earth orbit-to-Moon transports. All reusable .

Fantasy

 

[rightwinger]

The USAF was working on a space plane of which the X-15 was one of many in a series designed to take us toward the Pan Am space plane seen in "2001". That plan, like in the movie would have taken a few decades to get to the Moon, but allowed us to stay there with the infrastructure of Earth-to-Orbit space planes, a hub space station and Earth orbit-to-Moon transports. All reusable .

Yes, I remember. As a young Boy Scout, my scoutmaster worked at Edwards AFB. I met the X-15 / X-20 pilots and got to see all the space planes ... Congress killed that Air Force run space program and gave NASA the only ticket into space.

X-15 was some cool stuff for the early 60s
They still have one in the Air and Space Museum

 

[fncceo]

The USAF was working on a space plane of which the X-15 was one of many in a series designed to take us toward the Pan Am space plane seen in "2001". That plan, like in the movie would have taken a few decades to get to the Moon, but allowed us to stay there with the infrastructure of Earth-to-Orbit space planes, a hub space station and Earth orbit-to-Moon transports. All reusable .

Yes, I remember. As a young Boy Scout, my scoutmaster worked at Edwards AFB. I met the X-15 / X-20 pilots and got to see all the space planes ... Congress killed that Air Force run space program and gave NASA the only ticket into space.

X-15 was some cool stuff for the early 60s
They still have one in the Air and Space Museum

Imagine getting to shake hands with one of these guys when you're eight years old ...

 

[MarkDuffy]

 

[mamooth]

An interesting thing about Venus is that, given the density of the atmosphere, a hollow rigid habitation filled with air would float there, above the hot and corrosive zone.

That doesn't mean it's sensible to do so, of course. Humans do not build actual cities in places just because they're there. That explains the lack of self-sustaining large cities in Antarctica, which is an easily-accessible paradise compared to Mars. Launching mass out of big gravity well and then gently placing down into another big gravity well is not going to make economic sense in our lifetimes, and economics is what drives settlement.

 

[danielpalos]

Basically, NASA finally admits it's all been wishful thinking. They're not even close to being able to do it, and they won't be close in the foreseeable future. While they say it's all about money, it's far more than money. They just don't have the tech.

NASA finally admits it doesn’t have the funding to land humans on Mars

It doesn't help that they'll miss the best launch window. There are two 'launch window cycles' at play. There's the more important window, which comes every 2.2 years, when Earth is close to "catching up" with Mars. Every Mars launch happens in that window. And there's a less strong 16-year cycle, based on the eccentricity of each planet's orbit. That reaches a minimum in 2018. We'll miss that window, then it won't get that good again until the 2030's. It's maybe a 20% difference in flight time, but if you're trying to have your people not die from radiation, minimizing trip time is vital.

So, realistically, nothing until the 2030s, at the earliest. Maybe Chang-Díaz will have his VASIMR plasma drive working by then, which would help considerably. If it works, it would have much more power than the present Hall thruster plasma drives, and get twice the "gas mileage".

NASA’s longshot bet on a revolutionary rocket may be about to pay off

And another thing, it's been found the Martian soil is so toxic, it will kill all bacteria. Any bacterial life on Mars will have to be buried deep. The new European robot probe will bring a 2-meter drill.

Mars covered in toxic chemicals that can wipe out living organisms, tests reveal

At the end of the Space Race? A "mission to Mars instead of a War on Drugs", means we could have some sort of presence on Mars, by now.

We can never win a war on drugs.

 

[Divine Wind]

The USAF was working on a space plane of which the X-15 was one of many in a series designed to take us toward the Pan Am space plane seen in "2001". That plan, like in the movie would have taken a few decades to get to the Moon, but allowed us to stay there with the infrastructure of Earth-to-Orbit space planes, a hub space station and Earth orbit-to-Moon transports. All reusable .

Yes, I remember. As a young Boy Scout, my scoutmaster worked at Edwards AFB. I met the X-15 / X-20 pilots and got to see all the space planes ... Congress killed that Air Force run space program and gave NASA the only ticket into space.

Correct. Congress cancelled the USAF program, mandated NASA's Moon mission, then, once the JFK Moon goal was attained, cut NASA to the bone.

 

[Divine Wind]

Not a blank check. That check came with a directive. If they didn't meet their annual goes, the Democratic Congress could cancel it.

I grew up during that time ... we all lived space. Astronauts were rock stars and the world held it's breath for every launch. Every school kid could name all the parts of the LEM and we drank Tang for breakfast.

The country will never be behind anything ever again the way it was behind the Space Program ... that's what I mean by a wasted opportunity.

So did I. That doesn't change the fact NASA didn't have a choice in the nature of it's mission. The funding was to go to the Moon within the decade.

The USAF was working on a space plane of which the X-15 was one of many in a series designed to take us toward the Pan Am space plane seen in "2001". That plan, like in the movie would have taken a few decades to get to the Moon, but allowed us to stay there with the infrastructure of Earth-to-Orbit space planes, a hub space station and Earth orbit-to-Moon transports. All reusable .

Fantasy

So was going to the Moon in the 1950s.

 

[Divine Wind]

It didn't take long for space exploration to catch up with the current limits of chemistry & physics.

All kinds of fantasies came outta it like the suitcase flying cars of the Jetsons and 20 hour work week. Can you imagine nutcases in 3 dimensions?

It's back to the grunt work of basic science republicans hate & try to stop at every turn.

It's not as sexy.....but investment in energy, healthcare, communications, transportation pays more dividends than getting a photo-op on Mars

True, but the goal isn't "a photo-op on Mars".

Then what value do we get that can't be performed by a unmanned rovers?

Smart people have the chance to leave the planet leaving all of the dumbasses behind.

 

[rightwinger]

It didn't take long for space exploration to catch up with the current limits of chemistry & physics.

All kinds of fantasies came outta it like the suitcase flying cars of the Jetsons and 20 hour work week. Can you imagine nutcases in 3 dimensions?

It's back to the grunt work of basic science republicans hate & try to stop at every turn.

It's not as sexy.....but investment in energy, healthcare, communications, transportation pays more dividends than getting a photo-op on Mars

True, but the goal isn't "a photo-op on Mars".

Then what value do we get that can't be performed by a unmanned rovers?

Smart people have the chance to leave the planet leaving all of the dumbasses behind.

Why not just set up a colony on the bottom of the ocean. It is just as desolate and we cannot leave the security of our shelters and go for a walk

 

[Divine Wind]

It didn't take long for space exploration to catch up with the current limits of chemistry & physics.

All kinds of fantasies came outta it like the suitcase flying cars of the Jetsons and 20 hour work week. Can you imagine nutcases in 3 dimensions?

It's back to the grunt work of basic science republicans hate & try to stop at every turn.

It's not as sexy.....but investment in energy, healthcare, communications, transportation pays more dividends than getting a photo-op on Mars

True, but the goal isn't "a photo-op on Mars".

Then what value do we get that can't be performed by a unmanned rovers?

Smart people have the chance to leave the planet leaving all of the dumbasses behind.

Why not just set up a colony on the bottom of the ocean. It is just as desolate and we cannot leave the security of our shelters and go for a walk

Why not do both? Again, why do you insist what others choose to do? I can see why, as a taxpayer, you are against spending money on science, but why stop people like Musk or foreign governments from sending manned missions off-planet?

Stroll around on a planet devastated by an impact event or supervolcano? What's to see?

 

[MarkDuffy]

Three aircraft were built with two basic design goals. One goal was to achieve a speed of Mach 6, six times faster than the X-1 when it exceeded the speed of sound just a decade earlier. The other goal was to reach an altitude of 250,000 feet -- nearly 50 miles above the earth's surface, where there is no atmosphere to support wings and conventional control surfaces. The X-15 program reached those goals, and more.

By the time the nearly 10-year program ended at 199 flights in October 1968, an X-15 had been flown to a blistering speed of Mach 6.7 (4,520 mph), a record that still stands for winged aircraft. An X-15 also topped the altitude goal of 250,000 feet by nearly 19 miles. That record of 354,200 feet for a winged aircraft also remains intact.

But the X-15s produced more than speed and altitude records. Their accomplishments in several scientific disciplines can be traced to the development and growth of other aerospace programs and vehicles.

NASA - NASA Dryden Technology Facts - X-15

The program was ended when its mission goals were complete. We moved onto bigger & better.

 

[rightwinger]

It's not as sexy.....but investment in energy, healthcare, communications, transportation pays more dividends than getting a photo-op on Mars

True, but the goal isn't "a photo-op on Mars".

Then what value do we get that can't be performed by a unmanned rovers?

Smart people have the chance to leave the planet leaving all of the dumbasses behind.

Why not just set up a colony on the bottom of the ocean. It is just as desolate and we cannot leave the security of our shelters and go for a walk

Why not do both? Again, why do you insist what others choose to do? I can see why, as a taxpayer, you are against spending money on science, but why stop people like Musk or foreign governments from sending manned missions off-planet?

Stroll around on a planet devastated by an impact event or supervolcano? What's to see?

You just don't get it

Even in a nuclear holocaust......the surface of the earth will be more life sustaining than Mars

 

[Divine Wind]

True, but the goal isn't "a photo-op on Mars".

Then what value do we get that can't be performed by a unmanned rovers?

Smart people have the chance to leave the planet leaving all of the dumbasses behind.

Why not just set up a colony on the bottom of the ocean. It is just as desolate and we cannot leave the security of our shelters and go for a walk

Why not do both? Again, why do you insist what others choose to do? I can see why, as a taxpayer, you are against spending money on science, but why stop people like Musk or foreign governments from sending manned missions off-planet?

Stroll around on a planet devastated by an impact event or supervolcano? What's to see?

You just don't get it

Even in a nuclear holocaust......the surface of the earth will be more life sustaining than Mars

You don't get it, one big rock and we're done.

 

[MarkDuffy]

It's not as sexy.....but investment in energy, healthcare, communications, transportation pays more dividends than getting a photo-op on Mars

True, but the goal isn't "a photo-op on Mars".

Then what value do we get that can't be performed by a unmanned rovers?

Smart people have the chance to leave the planet leaving all of the dumbasses behind.

Why not just set up a colony on the bottom of the ocean. It is just as desolate and we cannot leave the security of our shelters and go for a walk

Why not do both? Again, why do you insist what others choose to do? I can see why, as a taxpayer, you are against spending money on science, but why stop people like Musk or foreign governments from sending manned missions off-planet?

Stroll around on a planet devastated by an impact event or supervolcano? What's to see?

Stroll around on a planet devastated by an impact event or supervolcano? What's to see?

Lions & Tigers and Bears, Oh MY!

Your Mars & Moon colony is more likely to to be wiped out.